Transcript

So as mentioned yesterday, for the moment we'll skip, I'm not ready to comment, I don't know if I will be, on the Chovos HaLevavos's classification of the chochmos. Hopefully we'll come back to that, but for now I'm not sure. So let's pick up here:

אך החכמה שהצורך אליה יותר אל התורה היא החכמה העליונה. היא החכמה האלוקית ואנחנו חייבים ללמוד אותה כדי להבין ולהכיר תורתנו. אך ללמוד אותה כדי להגיע אל הנאות העולם אסור לנו. ואמרו

Raboseinu: Tanya לאהבה את ה' אלוקיך לשמוע בקולו ולדבקה בו shelo yomar adam ekra kedei she-yikre'uni chacham. eshna kedei she-yikre'uni rebbe.

אשנה כדי שאהיה זקן ואשב בישיבה אלא למד מאהבה וסוף הכבוד לבוא. ואמרו עשה דברים לשם פועלם ודבר בהם לשמם אל תעשם עטרה להתגדל בהם ולא קרדום לחתוך בהם. ואומר אשרי איש ירא את ה' במצוותיו חפץ מאוד.

amar Rabbi Elazar במצוותיו ולא בשכר מצוותיו ki detnan

אל תהיו כעבדים המשמשים את הרב על מנת לקבל פרס אלא היו כעבדים המשמשים את הרב שלא על מנת לקבל פרס ויהי מורא שמים עליכם.

So there are two very, very important points here in the Chovos HaLevavos. The Tosafot in Berachot on daf yud zayin asks a stira in Gemara. The Gemara here in Berachot says העושה שלא לשמה נוח לו שלא נברא. Says Tosafot ve-hatanya ve-ha-amar רב יהודה אמר רב perek makom she-nahagu

לעולם יעסוק אדם בתורה ומצוות אפילו שלא לשמה שמתוך שלא לשמה בא לשמה.

So answers Tosafot ve-yesh lomar de-hacha mairi שאינו לומד אלא לקנטר חברו. Here the shelo lishmah is a negative shelo lishmah. He wants to be able to show up his chaverim. ve-hasam mairi, hasam in Pesachim where it says

לעולם יעסוק אדם אפילו שלא לשמה שמתוך שלא לשמה בא לשמה, התם מיירי שלומד על מנת שיכבדוהו.

So that shelo lishmah, it is a shelo lishmah but it's not a destructive, perverse shelo lishmah. So then you say מתוך שלא לשמה בא לשמה. But when the shelo lishmah is destructive, when it's perverse, le-kanter, so then it's נוח לו שלא נברא. Now Chovos HaLevavos just states that ללמוד אותה כדי להגיע אל הנאות העולם, again which means kavod, it means money, is assur. And he doesn't add a caveat that yeah, but מתוך שלא לשמה בא לשמה. So the mashma-us is that—the emes is you find the same thing in the Rambam because the Rambam in פרק י' הלכות תשובה הלכה ד' amru chachamim harishonim.

אמרו חכמים הראשונים שמא תאמר הריני לומד תורה בשביל שאהיה עשיר בשביל שאקרא רבי בשביל שאקבל שכר בעולם הבא תלמוד לומר לאהבה את השם. כל שאתם עושים לא תעשו אלא מאהבה.

Right, so there were three sort of motivations that are being rejected, right? Bishvil she'ehye ashir, bishvil she'ekarei rebbi, בשביל שאקבל שכר בעולם הבא. Now in Halacha Hey, the Rambam says

כל העוסק בתורה כדי לקבל שכר או כדי שלא תגיע אותו פורענות הרי זה עוסק בה שלא לשמה.

V'omru chachamim, and I'm skipping one line,

לעולם יעסוק אדם בתורה אפילו שלא לשמה שמתוך שלא לשמה בא לשמה.

So when the Rambam introduces רבי יהודה אמר רב's memra of shelo lishma, שמתוך שלא לשמה בא לשמה, he only repeats the kabbalas schar which would be Olam HaBa. He doesn't repeat the bishvil she'ehye ashir or bishvil she'ekarei rebbi. So the mashmaos in the Rambam is, and the Mesillas Yesharim on his own says this, that שמתוך שלא לשמה בא לשמה is a mattir to do mitzvos solely out of a motivation of kabbalas schar and avoiding onesh. It's not a mattir to do mitzvos for mundane considerations, Olam HaZeh-dik considerations. Mesillas Yesharim says that meforesh; it doesn't say it in the Rambam. Mesillas Yesharim doesn't quote anything else from Chazal, from Chazal to the, I don't know, to the early 1700s, doesn't quote any Geonim, Rishonim. I don't know why that is, but it is. But the emes is that is the pshat in the Rambam here. The Rambam holds like that that the heter שמתוך שלא לשמה בא לשמה or

לעולם יעסוק אדם בתורה אפילו שלא לשמה שמתוך שלא לשמה בא לשמה

is a heter where the shelo lishma is the kabbalas schar to avoid onesh. But if the shelo lishma is Olam HaZeh-dik considerations, there is no such heter. And that's what the Chovos HaLevavos holds also. That's why the Chovos HaLevavos says כדי להגיע הנאת עולם אסור לנו, and that's nothing to do with

רבי יהודה אמר רב לעולם יעסוק אדם בתורה אפילו שלא לשמה שמתוך שלא לשמה בא לשמה.

Okay, Tosafos disagrees. Tosafos thinks not. Tosafos thinks that that רבי יהודה אמר רב's heter encompasses even even an Olam HaZeh-dik shelo lishma of kavod. Why would you distinguish, why do the Rambam, Chovos HaLevavos, Mesillas Yesharim, the Gra also hold like that? Why do they all distinguish? Because lichora, there is a very fundamental difference. If a person puts on tefillin and he thinks to himself, oh, there's so much schar I'm going to get in Olam HaBa for putting on tefillin, or he puts on tefillin, oh, people are going to think I'm I'm so religious and and that will that will enhance my reputation. In the first case, he's being misyaches to the hanachas tefillin as a mitzvah. The schar v'onesh, Hakadosh Baruch Hu rewards mitzvos, so agav, yes, is it is it shelo lishma? It is shelo lishma in that he's focused not on doing what the Ribbono Shel Olam said kshe'la'atzmo as an end unto itself, but he's focused on doing what the Ribbono Shel Olam said for kabbalas schar, but he's being misyaches to it as a cheftza shel mitzvah. When he says I'll put on tefillin and people everyone will will see how pious I am, so then it's okay, he could hire a PR agent or he could put on tefillin; it's cheaper to put on tefillin than I don't know what the hourly rates they charge. It's cheaper to put on tefillin than it is to hire a PR agent. So then he's not even being misyaches to it as a mitzvah. He's he's distorting it into an instrument for, again, maybe it's for financial gain, על מנת שאהיה עשיר, maybe it's for social prestige, al mnat sheyikrauni. So that's what the Chovos HaLevavos, the Rambam hold that that's not included within Rabbi Yehuda's heter of shelo lishma. Emes is the Rambam in Hakdamas Perek Chelek is I don't know you have to figure out whether the Rambam in Perek Chelek aligns with the mashma'as hatzeirah in Hilchos Teshuvah. It's not pashut. The Rambam saying if one's only motive is olam hazeh motivation or if any part of his motivation to do a mitzvah is for the olam hazeh, that's the problem. Likhoura it has to be that he means his only motivation. The Rambam writes in the end of Makkos on the mishnah of רבי חנניה בן עקשיא that

רצה הקדוש ברוך הוא לזכות את ישראל לפיכך הרבה להם תורה ומצוות.

So usually we're not interested in pshat in the mishnah, we just want to get to the Kaddish DeRabbanan, but the Rambam was so concerned with Kaddish DeRabbanan, so he stops and says pshat in the mishnah. So the question that all that you know that engages all meforshim is, you know, why is it a zikui, you know, to have ribuy mitzvos? So the Rambam, the way the Rambam answers is as follows. The Rambam says it's a yesod that in order to be zocheh lechayei olam haba, obviously a person has to believe in the yud gimmel ikkarim and a person has to keep Shabbas and do all the mitzvos. He has to once in his life do one mitzvah totally lishmah. In addition to everything else, not as a substitute for everything else, which is how those who are masig on the Rambam read it, but it's not clear why they read it that way. In addition to everything else, a person has to once in his life do a mitzvah totally lishmah. Says רבי חנניה בן עקשיא and says inevitably that will happen. If a person's whole life is mekayem mitzvos, again, depending sort of on one's own techunas hanefesh, you know, for Reuven it may be this mitzvah and for Shimon it may be that mitzvah and for Levi yet a third mitzvah, but the Rambam says it's guaranteed that at one point and that's what רבי חנניה בן עקשיא says רצה הקדוש ברוך הוא לזכות את ישראל. Given the wide range and diversity of mitzvos, everyone is going to be sufficiently spiritually temperamentally attuned to a mitzvah that once in his life he's going to, at least once in his life, he's going to do at least one mitzvah totally lishmah. So you see from the Rambam the default is that we're always doing things with a mixture. At best we're doing things with a mixture of lishmah shelo lishmah, so he can't mean that the presence of a shemetz of, you know, the shelo lishmah, I maybe the shelo lishmah there he means is kabbalas sachar, I don't know, I don't think so. Peshat is he means when it's purely for that. Okay, so that's point number one. Likhoura, Chovos HaLevavos, that you have the same mashma'as in Chovos HaLevavos as you have in the Rambam. But there is another more subtle point. Again, let's reread Chovos HaLevavos and then we'll reread the Rambam.

ואמרו אשרי איש ירא את ה' במצותיו חפץ מאד, אמרו אלעזר במצותיו ולא בשכר מצותיו.

Good, you got that rabosai? Again,

ואמרו אשרי איש ירא את ה' במצותיו חפץ מאד, אמרו אלעזר במצותיו ולא בשכר מצותיו.

The parallel citation in the Rambam, again פרק י' הלכה ד' in Teshuvah,

ועוד אמרו חכמים במצותיו חפץ מאד, במצותיו ולא בשכר מצותיו.

Now back to Chovos HaLevavos. Keditnan

אל תהיו כעבדים המשמשים את הרב על מנת לקבל פרס אלא היו. אל תהיו כעבדים המשמשים את הרב שלא על מנת לקבל פרס ויהי מורא שמים עליכם.

The parallel citation in the Rambam, again yud-daled in Teshuvah:

וכן היו גדולי החכמים מצווים לנבונים מתלמידיהם ומשכילהם בייחוד אל תהיו כעבדים המשמשים את הרב על מנת לקבל פרס אלא היו כעבדים המשמשים את הרב שלא על מנת לקבל כלום אלא מפני שהוא הרב וראוי לשמשו כלומר עבדו מאהבה.

So what's the difference? They're quoting the same maamar, the same tvei maamorim. What's the difference? The Rambam's expression throughout Ahava, and Chovot Halevavot is just relating to it as the standard. Yes, but maybe, but maybe to take one step further, yes, that's excellent, but maybe one step further, the same Gemara about bimitzvotav chafetz meod, so the Rambam only quotes the second half of the pasuk, right? ובאמרו חכמים במצוותיו חפץ מאוד במצוותיו ולא בשכר מצוותיו. Chovot Halevavot quotes it, he quotes that אשרי איש ירא ה' במצוותיו חפץ מאוד, he quotes the first half of the pasuk as well. Now, maybe, I don't know, maybe the Chovot Halevavot likes to quote whole psukim and the Rambam likes to quote half psukim. So why did when the Rambam quotes the mishna of Antigonus ish Socho, so what does the Rambam omit? ויהי מורא שמים עליכם, right? And what does the Chovot Halevavot quote? ויהי מורא שמים עליכם. So the pshat is, again, this is, again, I don't know that this is a chiluk l'maaseh as the first point we discussed, but it's something, again, we're just going to point it out and then, hopefully, hopefully bli neder, b'ezrat Hashem revisit it. For the Rambam, what precludes the shelo lishmah is mitzvot ahavat Hashem. For the Chovot Halevavot, that's true, he certainly maskim to that because he quotes the earlier drashas Chazal, which the Rambam also quotes, of the

ואהבת את ה' אלקיך שלא יאמר אדם אקרא כדי שאהיה חכם אשנה כדי שיקראוני רבי אשנה כדי שאהיה זקן ויושב בישיבה אלא למד מאהבה.

So the Chovot Halevavot certainly agrees with the Rambam that mitzvot ahavas Hashem precludes these ulterior motives, but the Chovot Halevavot says something that the Rambam lichora does not agree with, that the Chovot Halevavot thinks that mitzvot yirat Hashem also precludes it. So for the Rambam, the drasha is based on the second half of the pasuk. Bimitzvotav chafetz meod, that's what the drasha is based on. It's not based on the first half of the pasuk, it's not relevant to the drasha, the Rambam doesn't quote it. For the Chovot Halevavot, no, it's one thought in the pasuk: he's yerei Hashem and consequently, as an expression thereof, bimitzvotav chafetz meod, במצוותיו ולא בשכר מצוותיו. Antigonus, for the Rambam, Antigonus ish Socho is telling us two things: he's telling us be'oved me'ahava, be'oved miyira. What warrants שלא על מנת לקבל פרס is the mitzvot ahavat Hashem, so the Rambam doesn't mention the end of the mishna. It's not relevant to what he's quoting from the mishna. I'm not even sure, according to the Chovot Halevavot, that Antigonus, I don't know, is Antigonus ish Socho even talking about ahava? Maybe Antigonus ish Socho is talking entirely about yira and the pshat in the entire mishna is

אל תהיו כעבדים המשמשים את הרב על מנת לקבל פרס אלא היו כעבדים המשמשים את הרב שלא על מנת לקבל פרס,

rather, instead of doing that, ויהי מורא שמים עליכם. Either way, either way, clearly, clearly for the Chovot Halevavot, the alternate ulterior motivations are precluded not only by ahavas Hashem but by yiras Hashem. So that's something to try to think about: what does that sort of indicate about the definition of yira, hein laRambam, hein laChovot Halevavot? Okay, let's stop there.